The synthetic hydroxyapatite implant: a report on 65 patients - PubMed (original) (raw)
Clinical Trial
The synthetic hydroxyapatite implant: a report on 65 patients
D R Jordan et al. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 1998 Jul.
Abstract
Sixty-five patients receiving the FCI synthetic hydroxyapatite implant (FCI3, FCI, Issy-Les-Moulineaux, France) after enucleation, evisceration, or as a secondary implant were studied under human trial guidelines established by Health and Welfare Canada. The implant is chemically identical to the original coralline Bio Eye (Integrated Orbital Implants Inc., San Diego, CA, U.S.A.), is easy to work with, and was implanted without difficulty using a wrap of polygalactin 910 (Vicryl mesh, Ethicon, Inc.) in the majority of patients. Postoperative drilling was carried out at approximately 6 months and found to be much easier than drilling of the Bio Eye. The implant could be hand drilled using drill bits rolled between the thumb and index finger. Postoperatively, patients were followed-up from 7 to 24 months and did not have any problems different from those associated with the original hydroxyapatite implant derived from sea coral (Bio Eye). One case of conjunctival dehiscence occurred at 4 weeks and required a temporalis fascia patch graft to repair. One implant became infected after drilling and had to be removed. The motility obtained with the third-generation FCI implant (FCI3) was similar to that seen with the Bio Eye, in comparable patients. That is, those receiving implants after an evisceration, on the whole, had better motility than those receiving an implant after primary enucleation or secondary implantation. The FCI3 hydroxyapatite implant is a viable alternative to the original Bio Eye hydroxyapatite implant. It's advantages are: 1) reduced cost, and 2) ease of drilling (a motorized drill is not required). The implant was given Health and Welfare approval in Canada on February 26, 1997.
Similar articles
- A synthetic hydroxyapatite implant: the so-called counterfeit implant.
Jordan DR, Munro SM, Brownstein S, Gilberg SM, Grahovac SZ. Jordan DR, et al. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 1998 Jul;14(4):244-9. doi: 10.1097/00002341-199807000-00004. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 1998. PMID: 9700731 - The use of vicryl mesh in 200 porous orbital implants: a technique with few exposures.
Jordan DR, Klapper SR, Gilberg SM. Jordan DR, et al. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003 Jan;19(1):53-61. doi: 10.1097/00002341-200301000-00007. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003. PMID: 12544793 - Experience with 120 synthetic hydroxyapatite implants (FCI3).
Jordan DR, Bawazeer A. Jordan DR, et al. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001 May;17(3):184-90. doi: 10.1097/00002341-200105000-00007. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001. PMID: 11388384 Clinical Trial. - Integrated orbital implants.
Perry AC. Perry AC. Adv Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 1990;8:75-81. Adv Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 1990. PMID: 2174242 Review. - Complications of hydroxyapatite orbital implants. A review of 100 consecutive cases and a comparison of Dexon mesh (polyglycolic acid) with scleral wrapping.
Oestreicher JH, Liu E, Berkowitz M. Oestreicher JH, et al. Ophthalmology. 1997 Feb;104(2):324-9. doi: 10.1016/s0161-6420(97)30316-9. Ophthalmology. 1997. PMID: 9052640 Review.
Cited by
- Long-term surgical outcomes of porous polyethylene orbital implants: a review of 314 cases.
Jung SK, Cho WK, Paik JS, Yang SW. Jung SK, et al. Br J Ophthalmol. 2012 Apr;96(4):494-8. doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2011-300132. Epub 2011 Nov 17. Br J Ophthalmol. 2012. PMID: 22096144 Free PMC article. - High density porous polyethylene material (Medpor) as an unwrapped orbital implant.
Chen YH, Cui HG. Chen YH, et al. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B. 2006 Aug;7(8):679-82. doi: 10.1631/jzus.2006.B0679. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B. 2006. PMID: 16845724 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources